Rhetorical Analysis Of Supersize Me

In the documentary “Supersize Me”, written and directed by Morgan Spurlock in 2004, due to the rising issue of obesity, Morgan goes on a 30 day challenge, traveling across the United States, to demonstrate the effects that eating nothing but fast food has on a person’s body and health. His diet for this 30 day challenge consist of nothing but McDonald’s food for three times a day for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. As he takes us on this journey with him, we learn that their are more cons then pros when it comes to eating fast food. In his documentary, Spurlock refers to the three main rhetorical appeals; ethos, pathos, and logos. For example Spurlock uses ethos when he goes in to see the doctors during his high fat diet to keep track of his blood levels, cholesterol levels, sugar levels, weight, and also keep track of how his inner body organs are doing. By this he is getting expert opinions on what he should be doing and how he should be taking care of his health while on his fast food diet. He also uses ethos by showing and experiencing what it is like to eat fast food and the effects that it has on our bodies. Spurlock uses pathos to appeal to the audience's emotions. An example of pathos that spurlock uses in his documentary is when he is vomiting, right after eating “Supersized” fries and drinking coke, right outside of his car. …show more content…
For breakfast, lunch, and dinner, Spurlock stuffed himself with what is considered America’s most unhealthy food choice for the fast food industry,and is the main cause of the obesity epidemic that is flooding the nation. While he uses the rhetorical appeals of logos, ethos, and pathos, Spurlock’s argument comes up short in the area of effectiveness. Although the documentary makes an attempt to prove that fast food is harmful, people are still continuing to consume it daily, transforming America into a super sized